Technology Literacy Assessment Tools

The idea that we need to assess the literacy of our students and teachers in terms of technology has been popped up every so often. Most recently the conversation has emerged because the annual reports actually include a question from the state on what a district is doing regarding this item. There are online assessment tools out there. The NY State Education Site (I am from NY after all) has some information. I just watched a demo from one of our service agencies who developed a tool for technology literacy assessment.
These are all well developed tools. My question is to the larger question: What are we truly assessing and why are we assessing it? I have a hard time spending a lot of time assessing if my 8th graders (or 8th grade teachers) know how to bold text, or save a file or file down a spreadsheet. What I really want to know is what can they do with this...and can they figure out how do what they need to do? It seems we are not assessing what is really important.
I am a big fan of the ideas and stances over at Gen Yes. They suggest that "students can take on much of the responsibility of demonstrating they possess these skills. Students do this by creating two projects that show they meet national technology standards. Including students as peer mentors and evaluators further reinforces this student-centered model."
My final question is: WHY ARE WE FOCUSING ON WORD ANYWAY. Why aren't we assessing the use of movie software or social networking or internet safety or.....there are aspects that are so much more important skills/strategies to be focused on.
More exploration to come.....
J:)

The way we learn...

I am never a big proponent of essentializing the way that people think and learn. However, we can say certain things about good learning (and teaching). We do not learn well under water without breathing equipment. (don't tell me that you are learning that you can't breathe underwater...that is a very quick lesson.)
There are more relevant ideas that we know about learning: It must be meaningful, it involves people, it is active, etc.
So my quote of the day: "Unfortunately, if human learning works best in a certain way, given the sorts of biological creatures we are, then it is not going to work well in another way just because educators, policymakers, and politicians want it to." (Gee, 2003, p. 68).
Or you can watch the presentation on How the Brain Works over at Darren's blog. The presenter says similar things but in a different way. Best line: "If we wanted to create the perfect opposite of what we know about how the brain works in education,it would look like the modern classroom"
Ouch...SO my goal- to start the conversations I am having in districts with: So what do we know we should be doing? Then how do we get there? This is very different than "What do you think we should do?" One is what should we do "in response to the current situation" The other is what should we be doing "in looking towards the future." I hope that with this being the focus of the conversation we will be able to move forward rather than just responding to what is.
Well, off for more exploring in the world of Learning, Identity and Technology.

The Dangerous Assumptions

Setting up the rant: In catching up on my blog reading (and now apparently writing) I ran into an interesting theme that I have been bouncing around in my head already. It is an underlying assumption in all our conversations on Web 2.0 and students. We are reducing all people under age...say 25 to Digital Natives.
Rant begins: Granted I have often talked about the way in which the society in which we live changes the way we think. Thus, that there are blogs and they are a part of modern conversation impacts how a person thinks. The less history a person has, the less they recognize that this Web 2.0 is 'new.' Thus, the whole idea of digital native emerges.
And sure there are many youth who have taken the idea of blogging and really done something with it: TakingITGlobal, Global Kids, Students20h and 25 Days to Make a Difference are all wonderful examples of this. Will Richardson suggests that these are the examples that we should be talking about (and I agree!!)
Yet the assumption that I have run into time and again (including today at a meeting) is that the students get it and if we just get out of their way they will use these tools in our classrooms to do what we want them to...Umm...no. Yet, we seem to think that because a student can learn a tool better than us they will utilize it in explicitly meaningful ways to us.
We Assume That

1. All students learn and interact best and most naturally in this digital world
2. If given the chance to use the 'tools of this generation' in the classroom students will do so to meet our goals and objectives
3. Using tool is the most important part of what they do with the tool

By making these assumptions, we do not foster an environment of creative exploration and learning. Will Richardson mentions this in his critique of The Dumbest Generation. It is even hitting the research circles (sorry to my fellow researchers for the slight..but we do tend to be a little slower on picking things up sometimes). The AERA (research association) just published an article on pre-service teacher's use of online forums, discussing the surprising results that students were not critical in their use of the forum. My question is: Why would they have been? Are we expecting spontaneous development of critical metacognition and deep reflection both on subject matter and themselves as learners just because they can easily post their thoughts? My second and more painful question: Do we recognize this critical thinking and reflection when it is happening...or do we see it as not aligned to our Curricular Objective?
Final Thought: The Web 2.0 (or as BrianC Smith is starting to say, social media) tools make it easier to _______________. We need to forget about the tools and the easier part and fill in the blank.
Or as I would type in one of my papers: Tools mediate the meaning making process...they do not make it meaningful...that's what people do.